Forums | MacLife

benightedbastard · 2005-06-06 4:49 pm

Clearly this migration will be a big milestone in the Apple / OS X roadmap, and the full repercussions won't be known for a while, but that doesn't mean we can't speculate rampantly for the moment.

First off, what's the hardware going to be like? Will Apple adopt high-end and low-end chips? Do Intel still make those celery things?

How are developers going to handle this? Do you think there will be much disillusionment among them at yet another migration, or will it be small enough not to bother them overly? How well will Rosetta pick up the slack? Do you think we'll see a WINE-type layer running smoothly on intel based macs? What's going to happen to PPC Linux distros? Will developers be stuck with Xcode? What other software is going to lose out?

How long till someone haxors OS X to run on any PC? Off the cuff I'd imagine it wouldn't be too difficult, I still remember running vMac by extracting Loud Harmonicas from my Plus.

What's going to happen to sales? Will current PPC sales slump? Will any current fanatics avoid buying an intel mac? Will sales to users who plan to run Windows on their mac be significant?

What's it going to mean for Intel? Will the mac platform be a minor low-profit venture for them like it is for IBM, and how will that be reflected in the relationship? Where will the mac be in 5 years time? I'm assuming Apple likes the look of intel's roadmap, but now they've jumped ship I think they have to be in it for the long haul. I hope that means Apple and Intel will have a good long-term relationship planned out properly.

What's the marketing going to be like now? I'm sure images of pentium snails and intel bunnies have occurred to many, but marketing is a fickle beast with a short memory. I'm thinking that computer advertising is going to rely less and less on performance and more on the whole user experience thing.

What do you think this spells in terms of hardware DRM? Does this pave the way for an iTunes video store and a video iPod? I trust apple to implement such DRM in a way that's less restrictive to normal use than other companies might, but there will be plenty of people that do not like it, I'm sure. Unfortunately, I believe we do need DRM systems implemented in future technology, but they need to be ones that do not hamper the user. That's tricky.

As I'm sure has been pointed out all over the web already, the last great CPU migration was to the 'dark side' too, when we went to IBM processors. I still remember playing Bash Big Blue on the 128K. How readily do you think the majority of users will embrace the Intel migration?

And finally, given the inevitable comparison, how do you think this migration will compare to the 68k to PPC move?

Last edited by benightedbastard (2005-06-06 5:07 pm)

ChronoTriggerXP · 2005-06-06 5:13 pm

I've been wonder... if Apple went to Intel or Intel came to Apple... because I get the impression that a lot of companies are getting tired of being on the MS leash. Might this be an alliance set with the goal of toppling MS's dominance?

Scott · 2005-06-06 5:19 pm

My guess is that running OSX on a non Apple box would be difficult. There are sure to be hardware factors to consider. While there are "l33t haxors" out there, hacking hardware is different than intercepting a data stream. Most of the "hacking" that goes on really isn't that impressive. Except Pear, but that is still an emulator, and it would require emulation to get passed the hardware issues. So even is possible, it would be slower.

But then again, I thought the Intel thing was BS and sure that the long standing version of X running on Intel was total BS too. So my opinions on this issue are pretty much useless.

oatmeal · 2005-06-06 5:21 pm

Looks like Microsoft's investment in VPC just got the legs kicked out from under it. smile

Mustapha Mond · 2005-06-06 5:27 pm

I can't address all those points, but I'll say that I think the best thing for apple will be the end of the speed wars. No more, "the 2gig g5 is faster than the 2.5gig intel because the pipeline is blahblahblah..." Now it'll just be the OS and the overall quality of the hardware, and that puts the ball in Apple's court.

I also think it's a smart move on Apple's part to not allow clones. I'm sure someone will hack OSX so it runs on everything from a POS DIY PC to your neighbor's cuisinart, but the vast majority of people aren't going to bother with any of that.

I'll miss making fun of Intel, but overall I'm psyched. (Unfortunately for apple in the short term, I'm postponing any more major hardware buys for at least a year.)

benightedbastard · 2005-06-06 5:27 pm

Don't MS also tout VPC for running another windows layer within windows?

Scott wrote:
My guess is that running OSX on a non Apple box would be difficult. There are sure to be hardware factors to consider. While there are "l33t haxors" out there, hacking hardware is different than intercepting a data stream. Most of the "hacking" that goes on really isn't that impressive. Except Pear, but that is still an emulator, and it would require emulation to get passed the hardware issues. So even is possible, it would be slower.

But then again, I thought the Intel thing was BS and sure that the long standing version of X running on Intel was total BS too. So my opinions on this issue are pretty much useless.

No no, I value you input.

I see your point on those hardware factors. But, I'm sure that running it in a layer on top of windows would be quite possible at some point.

benightedbastard · 2005-06-06 5:32 pm

Mustapha Mond wrote:
(Unfortunately for apple in the short term, I'm postponing any more major hardware buys for at least a year.)

I've heard several people say that now. I'm wondering how big a trend it would be.

If anyone can think of other issues in the move, please share.

NAG · 2005-06-06 5:32 pm

Well the game developers seem to be either flipping out or left wondering.

http://www.insidemacgames.com/features/view.php?ID=355

Gatchaman · 2005-06-06 5:39 pm

oatmeal wrote:
Looks like Microsoft's investment in VPC just got the legs kicked out from under it.

Yeah, but VPC was a dead end anyhow.

after-life · 2005-06-06 5:40 pm

Jesus Christ, it really happened.

Could this mean the death of Mac native applications? I can see Quark and other guys cutting costs and forcing us to run the Windows versions in some sort of WINE layer.

I don't think it was worth the risk.

iFrankie · 2005-06-06 5:41 pm

I'm willing to bet this has everything to do with IBM giving Microsoft a 3.2GHz Multi-Core PowerPC chip.

I know. I know. They are different chips. But I'm telling you, Steve took like a slap in the face.

oatmeal · 2005-06-06 5:44 pm

iFrankie wrote:
I'm willing to bet this has everything to do with IBM giving Microsoft a 3.2GHz Multi-Core PowerPC chip.

I know. I know. They are different chips. But I'm telling you, Steve took like a slap in the face.

That makes a lot of sense. nod

ABigSmall · 2005-06-06 5:46 pm

I'm in absolute shock.

oatmeal · 2005-06-06 5:47 pm

ABigSmall wrote:
I'm in absolute shock.

I really don't know what to say. They spent so much time convincing us of how much better the PPC was...

Jon · 2005-06-06 5:50 pm

:clicks oats sig: <<Apple

after-life · 2005-06-06 5:50 pm

Are these going to be AMD64 chips? I certainly hope so. G5 to x86 would be a step backward.

Beattie · 2005-06-06 5:52 pm

Well, I have been considering buying a new laptop soon. This pretty much means it wont be a mac.

Also, I guess that mac-on-linux will work under x86 linux distros in the future. That would be pretty awesome.

Maybe this will allow Apple to lower the price on all the machines that have been too expensive and underspec'd.

Beattie · 2005-06-06 5:53 pm

after-life wrote:
Are these going to be AMD64 chips? I certainly hope so. G5 to x86 would be a step backward.

Yea... Intel makes a lot of *AMD* 64 chips...

akb825 · 2005-06-06 5:53 pm

Um, in case you haven't realized, AMD 64 is made by AMD, not Intel...

I'm sure that Intel has some sweet new chips out for the future, including 64 bit. shrug

Kirk · 2005-06-06 5:59 pm

My first concern, besides the DRM issues, is service life. The Intel chips are designed for a three year service life. The PowerPC chips had a ten year design life. Handing down your computer to your kids or reselling them just got killed. This is effectively a hidden cost.

oatmeal · 2005-06-06 5:59 pm

akb825 wrote:
Um, in case you haven't realized, AMD 64 is made by AMD, not Intel...

I'm sure that Intel has some sweet new chips out for the future, including 64 bit.

They had better freaking be some sort of 64 bit processors. After the huge freaking deal they made about 64 bit processors? smurf.

Beattie · 2005-06-06 6:03 pm

oatmeal wrote:
akb825 wrote:
Um, in case you haven't realized, AMD 64 is made by AMD, not Intel...

I'm sure that Intel has some sweet new chips out for the future, including 64 bit.
They had better freaking be some sort of 64 bit processors. After the huge freaking deal they made about 64 bit processors? smurf.

Maybe they will use Itanium... Or some new Intel chip that uses x86-64 (amd64)

Gary Patterson · 2005-06-06 6:09 pm

Intel are releasing chips soon that include DRM to support the Trusted Computing thingy. That DRM layer is in hardware, and should be able to be used to link hardware with software, or lock software out.

It's not a big leap to link that technology with the idea that OS X-x86-64 will be on Apple boxes only. The ability to do that and be extremely difficult to hack is pretty much here now. Software alone won't do it, and even the world's best hackers won't be able to crack open a CPU to modify it.

Hmm... just a possibility...

TonyPrevite · 2005-06-06 6:11 pm

Pentium "D" That's what Apple is after for the DRM built in.

american007 · 2005-06-06 6:12 pm

oatmeal wrote:
ABigSmall wrote:
I'm in absolute shock.
I really don't know what to say. They spent so much time convincing us of how much better the PPC was...

http://img154.echo.cx/img154/219/634362 … tside8.jpg

Last edited by benightedbastard (2005-06-06 6:52 pm)

Forums | MacLife

#1 2005-06-06 4:49 pm

The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#2 2005-06-06 5:13 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#3 2005-06-06 5:19 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#4 2005-06-06 5:21 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#5 2005-06-06 5:27 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#6 2005-06-06 5:27 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

Scott wrote:

#7 2005-06-06 5:32 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

Mustapha Mond wrote:

#8 2005-06-06 5:32 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#9 2005-06-06 5:39 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

oatmeal wrote:

#10 2005-06-06 5:40 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#11 2005-06-06 5:41 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#12 2005-06-06 5:44 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

iFrankie wrote:

#13 2005-06-06 5:46 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#14 2005-06-06 5:47 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

ABigSmall wrote:

#15 2005-06-06 5:50 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#16 2005-06-06 5:50 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#17 2005-06-06 5:52 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#18 2005-06-06 5:53 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

after-life wrote:

#19 2005-06-06 5:53 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#20 2005-06-06 5:59 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#21 2005-06-06 5:59 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

akb825 wrote:

#22 2005-06-06 6:03 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

oatmeal wrote:

akb825 wrote:

#23 2005-06-06 6:09 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#24 2005-06-06 6:11 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

#25 2005-06-06 6:12 pm

Re: The move to Intel - What will the repercussions be?

oatmeal wrote:

ABigSmall wrote:

Board footer